And speaking of Triumph 

"sm70- why not Duesenberg?" (sm70-whynotduesenberg) 09/17/2016 at 21:48 • Filed to: None

0

14

Somebody was smoking some serious crack when reporting the reliability of the Rover V8 on the TR8 Wikipedia page.

Edit: Apparently the engine itself wasn't that bad. I stand corrected.

Jordan and the Slowrunner, Boomer Intensifies > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 09/17/2016 at 21:53

4

I was under the impression that the Rover wasn’t that bad, it was everything connected to it.

JawzX2, Boost Addict. 1.6t, 2.7tt, 4.2t > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 09/17/2016 at 21:54

2

well, I mean... Compared to the Triumph v8 the Rover was indeed "reliable, flexible and robust".

djmt1 > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 09/17/2016 at 22:02

2

In fairness, the engines themselves are pretty reliable. Now all the bollocks attached to them, well as Wikipedia says, history has shown.

ranwhenparked > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 09/17/2016 at 22:06

2

There really wasn’t anything wrong with the Buick-Rover V8 design, it was a reasonably reliable engine by the standards of the time. The bad reputation it had was mainly left over from its first few years under GM, and was due to owners and mechanics not being familiar with the properties of aluminum and accidentally causing damage during routine maintenance.

I believe it is still in limited production at MCT ReMan Ltd.

Funktheduck > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 09/17/2016 at 22:13

1

I saw a TR8 today

AMGtech - now with more recalls! > ranwhenparked 09/17/2016 at 22:29

1

Lol wut?

Liners, heads, blocks, cams, bearings, chains and the list of high failure rate components just goes on and on. When I worked at a rover shop we were constantly parting out trucks with dead engines the owners no longer wanted, we had warehouse shelves with dozens of dead engines on them, kept only for parts and possibility of installing new liners in the future.

AMGtech - now with more recalls! > djmt1 09/17/2016 at 22:29

0

Haha see my response to ranwhenparked

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > AMGtech - now with more recalls! 09/17/2016 at 22:31

0

I feel validated.

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > Funktheduck 09/17/2016 at 22:31

0

So did I.

Funktheduck > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 09/17/2016 at 22:32

1

I realized after some scrolling. The one you saw was in better condition

djmt1 > AMGtech - now with more recalls! 09/17/2016 at 22:33

0

Out of all the vehicles with dead engines what percentage were Land Rovers?

ranwhenparked > AMGtech - now with more recalls! 09/17/2016 at 22:52

2

You do know that the liner problem was the result of worn out tooling, right? Granted, a factory problem, but nothing to do with the design of the engine itself. It mostly affects 1990s and ‘00s models. The Buick 3800 V6 produced through 2008 and the Buick small block V8 produced through 1980 were cast iron derivatives of the same basic design and were certainly thought of as robust. Except for the ‘90s V6s with the plastic manifolds.

AMGtech - now with more recalls! > ranwhenparked 09/17/2016 at 23:28

0

Yes. But have you seen the size of pedestal the liner sits on in the block? Pathetically tiny. Perfectly adequate for iron, but a joke for aluminum. That and the aluminum behind the liner is too thin, again fine for iron though. 10 seconds of overheating is often all it takes for these to develop liner/block problems. Then consider all the cooling system issues they already have.

AMGtech - now with more recalls! > djmt1 09/17/2016 at 23:33

0

Valid question. All. That’s pretty much all we worked on. We did have a Morgan come in once though! Not a lot of triumphs running around here.